tv BOS Budget and Finance Sub Committee 32317 SFGTV March 30, 2017 10:00am-11:01am PDT
>> good morning. all right, ladies and gentlemen good morning and welcome to the regular meeting, to my left and tang and yee is excused and our clerk is mr. victor young and, would i like to thank, who are assisting us with this broadcast at sfgovtv. mr. clerk do we have announcements? >> please silence all cell phones and electronic devices completed cards should be submitted to the clerk. >> items acted upon today will apioneer on the april, 4th, 2017, board of supervisors
agenda, unless otherwise stated. >> could you call item one? >> yes, would you like to make an official motion to ex-excuse --. >> yes, i will make a motion to excuse supervisor yee. >> we will take that motion without objection. >> thank you. >> supervisor yee is excused and now call item one. >> item one, resolution approving the leg, 110-73 oechlt one, between the smart cart and, acting by and through the commission, for a total term of may 15, to 2012, to june, 2015.
>> the original term expires in june of this year. and the airport is requesting the board's approval to exercise to extend through 2018. the lease before you has two component and the first being a self-serve, luggage cart, where the smart cart provides, 400,000 or 500 luggage parts to rent to passengers throughout the terminals at sfo at a cost of $5 per cart. and this part of the lease generates the rent, and rent equal to the greater of either 25 percent of the annual gross revenues of a minimum annual guarantee of approximately, 60,
673,000 dollars. and that is per year. the second part of the lease, is the custom's program. where the smart cart provides, at least, 1500 luggage carts, free of charge for arriving international passengers in the customs area of the international terminal. this part of the lease requires the airport to reimburse the smart cart to provide the free carts in customs. and the airport will pay an annual service fee equal to the lesser of either a 2.7 million service fee. or 1 dollar and 20 cents per cart used whichever is less. >> based on the estimates of the cart usage for both programs during the initial term, the airport staff estimates a maximum net payment of 4.2 million dollars over the two year extension.
the a port does agree to better reflect the net payments that were made during the initial term as well as not-to-exceed amount for the total contract including twot year extension. i would be happy to answer any questions that you have. >> thank you very much. supervisor tang as a question for you. thank you, i could not tell from the packet whether there is any plans for the future to raise the fee, $5 is quite a bit to be able to push your luggage around. >> i believe that this is pretty standard across the industry. the 5 dollars has been and it has been $5 since the 2012 term and so it has been in place for a while and i actually surprised that it was not increasing it is staying at $5, and i think that there may be the fee in there, may be to somehow subsidize a
little bit of the three, luggage cart uses because you will notice when the airport pays on the actual cart for the usage for the free carts it is only at $1.20, but i do believe that $5 is pretty standard nationally. it is not higher at sfo than it is at other places. >> thank you. >> we have a legislative analyst report on this item. >> good morning, mr. rose. >> madam chair and supervisor tang, on page 4 of our report, we report that under the existing initial 5 year term of the agreement, and that is from july first 2012, to june, 2017, and as you know the board of supervisors approved that agreement. the airport will pay the smart catre fees of 12 million 456 and all in smart carte estimated percentage of 3 million 79 it 010, for the estimated payments
by the airport of 8 million. and that is shown in table two. on tpage 4 of our report. >> thank you very much. >> i will be quick. >> on page 5 as she has already indicated. the airport estimate as a net payment to smart carte over the extensions from july, first, 17th, to june, 30, 2019, of 4 million. and that is shown in table three on page 5 of our report. and our recommendation at the bottom of page 5 is that we recommend that you amend the proposed resolution, and state that the net payment to the airport and the smart carte to the original five year agreement term to july first, 2012, to june, 3 0g9, is 8 million. and the next payment by the airport to the smart carte for the term in july first, 2017 through june, 2019 is not-to-exceed, 4 million.
and for a total net payment not-to-exceed, 12 million, 924, 595, and we do recommend that you approve this resolution as amended. >> thank you and we appreciate the recommendations for amendments and we will take those amendments but before we take at mendments let's take public comment. ladies and gentlemen if you would like to comment on item one, please do so, at the podium you will have two minutes, you will hear a soft chime, seeing no comment, i it is closed. >> i will make a motion to adopted amendments and send it forward with the positive recommendation as amended. >> thank you. >> are you ready to go? >> how about item two? >>ordinance appropriating $12,807,266 of general obligation bond interest earnings for the san francisco general hospital and trauma center in fy2016-2017 and placing $392,406 on controller's reserve pending interest accrual and review of arbitrage costs.
okay, we have mr. joe chin from the department of public works, the mayor is responsible for this particular piece of legislation. public works and program manage sxer this morning, i want to spend a few minutes to give an overview of the ordinance and to highlight some of the project achievement and milestones on the rebuilt projects since the inception. and on behalf of the public hel and this public works, we are requesting the board of support and approval of the ordinance in front of you today, to appropriate the geo bond interest earnings to add to the budget and of the 12 million, of
the requested appropriation, it will allow for the close out of the new hospital construction contract and resolve outstanding change orders associated with the project for over 56 subcontractors it has been a long process to sit down with all of the subcontractors and where it comes at a point where we have finalized numbers that we can work with. and 392,406 will also be placed on the controller's reserves. and in terms of project highlights, the construction of the new hospital started over 8 years ago. and with the implementation of the site readiness starting in 2008, with he is ka vagus for the new hospital in 2009 and finally completing being achieved in august of 2015. but it has been a long, long, project. and patient owes fish officiall moved into the hospital in may of 2016. i am just also happy to report
that the san francisco general hospital and trauma center has also received a distinction of the first lead goal in california. and so at this point, i am available to answer any questions that you may have about the project. or about the ordinance. >> all right, thank you very much. >> let's go to the budget and let's have the analyst report for us. >> yes, madam chair, supervisor tang on page nine of our report of the 12 million, the appropriation, 12 million, 388, 121 will be used to fund the change orders in order to close out the existing construction contracts. the expenditure of the 12 million is summarized in table four on page nine of our report. we recommend that you approve this ordinance. >> all right, thank you for the recommendation. supervisor tang, do you have any remarks. >> thank you, so just to clarify, it looks like the project had 13.1 million remaining balance from the cost savings but that will be eaten up. so even though you are going to
be applying the 13.1, towards the other things that you still have an additional roughly, 12.8, or minus the three, 300 something that you are going to put on reserve. and to close out; is that correct? ? >> thank you for the questions. so let me explain, i believe that you are referring to the table or references the 12.56210 number and so those are the remaining balance in property ject budget to address other close outs related to the project and mostly for the soft cause and the permanent cost for the construction project. and so, all of that has been ear marked for expenditures on the project. okay. >> so then and then on top of that, then you still need the additional for you know the patient and staff safety, and amenities and the nursing station amodification and the
licensing requirements and the equipment changes? ; is that correct? ? >> that is correct, and in the program budget there is a 4 million dollars left in the program budget and that has been set aside that we have been working with the department of public health to prioritize a lot of the needs and wants. and it has been a long project and as for the long projects we also drives a lot of the new scope and that is part and parcel to the nature of the hospital operation and trying to make it as safe as, and the patients will have a good experience. >> thank you. >> we are going to public comment at this time. any member of the public that would like to comment. >> come up. >> seeing number, public comment is closed. supervisor, >> all right. so i think what we, do we have
to take a motion to place the 392 on reserve in or is that just embedded in this? >> it is embedded. >> okay, so i will make a motion to send forth this ordinance with the positive recommendation to the full board. >> without objection that motion passes. >> next item. >> on the aagain ta, item three. >>hearing to consider the release of reserved funds to the sheriff's department, placed on budget and finance committee reserve by the fy2016-2017 annual appropriation ordinance (file no. 160628), in the amount of $135,000 to fund the body worn camera program. >> this is a hearing to release the 100,000 for the body cameras, it is good to see you chief deputy, good morning. >> good morning, and good morning, supervisor tang, i am here to represent the department and, currently i am the division chief of the custody operations division for the san francisco sheriff's department. we are looking to seek the
release of some reserve funds, to finance our pilot program on body worn cameras, the goal of this is to promote transparency and accountability in regard to our operations up and in the county jail number four on the 7th floor on the hall of justice. the idea of the pilot program is to provide a balance of the benefits of the body worn camera and the activity of the staff and reasonable expectation of privacy for all involved parties. we have a unique situation in the jail system where we are under conditions of confinement. we try to provide as much of an expectation of privacy. and we have them up there in the care and the use of the body warn cameras are slightly different in that setting as opposed to the public setting.
>> the pilot program and being able to exam the metric and to be able to provide that transparency and accountability that we see. the program itself will envision the use of these cameras on 30, identified deputy sheriffs within that jail. and they would be activated with a button that records, the video and sound and securely up load those bad data through the internet through the cloud base storage. we have a pilot program, policy in place right now, in order to insure what i referenced earlier is the expectations of the privacy of the people have in our care, the review committee that we have, i believe that is in your packets. it will consist of the members of our department and, members of the units that our department, employ and the department of public hel and this our legal team in order for us to properly review that information. >> and i believe that you have the packets that will provided
by the sheriff along with a letter that she gave, if not, i have the packets that i will provide and i can give to the clerk. >> maybe you could might it be in the efile but we don't have it here and mr. clerk do you have is a copy for the file? >> i do the believe that i do. >> i also have the presentation that we could show you right now. >> that would be good. >> >> just by way of background, for the folks at home, during last year, the policy of body cameras was being developed and the board recommended placing the $135,000 that we are going to be hearing, whether we are going to prove it or not. the senate on budget reserve, pending the submission from the sheriff's department and the final plan, the plan is what they are going to be presenting today. >> yes. >> sorry for the delay. >> that is okay.
sfgov tv could we get the lap top? >> all right. >> this is what i referenced in the initial presentation and, i don't know if you can see that too clearly. probably not. i have some hard copies also that you can follow along with. >> yeah. the first slide gives an overview of the pilot program, to test the cameras, to augment the system and to promote
transparency, and the seuss's to provide, video and audio with many of the staff and those that we are in charge of the custody and care of. >> one of the major considerations as referenced earlier was the concerns of expectation of privacy that people have and secondly to that is to be able to insure the proper use of the cameras to gather the information for the viability of the technology to promote our goals and to protect the rights of the inmate and the deputies in our system. >> i gave some faqs here in regard to what the body worn cap ra is, i believe that you can review those on the hard copy and i don't know if you want me to go over them in terms of the presentation itself? >> what is a body worn camera whashgs kind of a camera will you be using? >> that i think we are okay. >> i don't think that we need to do that. >> i do have one quick question. the company that is providing the camera, is this the same question that sfpd contracts with?
>> yes, madam chair, this is the taser international company. >> so we will be piggy back og that contract. >> so, are we getting a deal? >> i believe we are. the initial asks for us last year as 135,000. >> i believe and based on the budget legislative analyst report, we are now looking at asking for only, 41,000 of that amount. >> okay. >> that is a significant reduction in our request. >> right. >> what we would like to do is fund the program itself right now, for the pilot program and hopefully with the data gathered look to in the future, providing this technology to all of our staff and all of our operations. >> will you be able to describe to us the process that you engaged with developing the policy and then go over that policy, the department's policy for the body cameras? >> certainly. >> the policy itself. is still under draft. and we have already engaged in discussions with both of the
collective gar binni bargaining units. >> the pilot program has been passed across the table as well. and it has been given the go ahead by that staff in terms whaf we plan on accomplish wg that program, to gather the information and to assuage the staff as to the technology itself and kind of ak la mate them to the use. and we have a program which has been in the development since for the past two and a half years, actually. and since the time of the initial development, we have had incidents of a county jail number four, which have really highlighted the need to have this technology present in our system. we had some instances a few years ago, which called in to question the behaviors of some of our staff. this technology will provide us with a method in which we can review the actions of our staff in their interactions to the
inmate to provide that transparency. >> and i don't want to interrupt too much further, but supervisor tang wanted to see the question. >> just a piggy back on the same questions of kument that is providing the cameras in terms of the back end, ongoing, support for maintenance of the foodage, and so forth, and are you also, using something similar. >> yes, we are. >> so the technology as i mentioned was a cloud based storage of the bet a that is collected from the camera and that technology is similar and consistent with what sfpd will be using as well. >> okay. >> did you have any other questions related to the technology itself. >> not related to the technology. >> i think that we are having enough hearings about the technology and, we have been talking about that for a few years now. >> i wanted to hear a little bit more about the policies, so i suppose if we were to go to --. >> sure, let's go to -- our required use activations, part
of our policies will outline when, our staff will be required to turn their devices on. as you can see right now, in terms of operations, this will be for what we called extractions when we have to remove people torqu remove, to move them where they don't want to be moved. >> altercations involving inmates and, prisoner verses staff fights, the safety placements involving the uses of force or the response to emergency calls. for example, also, to highlight further the use of force included in the required use activation. and listed as follows, defensiveself from the attacks of another inmate, any time that we have to use the physical control, wieb required use activation. or any other circumstances requiring an immediate response, all staff will be required to turn on their cameras. >> one note, there is also a
stimulation that deputies are always going to make reasonable efforts to activate the camera prior to any contact required in the situations. it is not just that they are going to be trained on activating these devices at the time of anything happening but prior to anything possibly happening. >> that we will get the full coverage. and there is also, a reference to discretionary use. in our draft policies, deputies are going to be asked to activate the body worn cameras to record any contacts where the recording is not required. and it is going to be recommended that they record any contact that could lead to or be later used as evidence. this is a catchall, in terms of having people activate their des when dealing with people who may be existing negative behaviors or maybe, confrontational in their behavior, in something that will result from a complaint. for me, there are staff members or from our inmates.
>> and finally, the wernz that i referenced, we have areas in our jail that which, although there say lower expectation of the privacy under the conditions of confinement. there are still actions that we take to insure that the people still have some sense of privacy. so we want to protect the dignity of the victim and uninvolved parties in these situations. we want to be cognizant of where we are recording things and so anywhere that a deputy would not normally go, we will also be areas that have been identified in our policy. where they will not be allowed to video tape anything. >> i have a question. >> so this is the draft of the policy, when will the policy be final? >> the policy will be final as it goes, part of the wishes of the sheriff is to use some of the data that we collect and, some of the applications that we have in our every day operations. during the pilot program.
to infuse some of that information into the policy itself. so that it will be a living document as all policies are. but some of the information that we gather from the day-to-day use, will be used to help us finalize that policy. >> sorry, go ahead. >> the actual, pilot program itself is schedule to last for up to 12 months. >> when does it begin? >> as soon as we get approval. >> so what, are there any internal steps that you have to go through for at proval process. you come to the board of supervisors and you come to the budget and then it goes to the full board and we vote on it and then you are set and there are no more approval process. >> one thing that i have not referenced yet, madam chair, is that we have an operation's plan already set to go, so that once we get the devices there are plans in place for the training of staff to include our vest gayiga investigative staff, in addition to the people that are going to be using the devices and there
will also be notifications made to all people involved. not just our staff, but all of our contract people as well. >> what is the data review process going to be? ha wha we have is the review and it will be covered by the body worn camera and the pilot review committee and, they will be tasked at looking at items such as it is training gaps in the use of the camera, and the training gaps reviewed by the use of the camera. any privacprivacy. and impacts on the the use of force impacts on our use of force and, also, evidence collection for the administrative and criminal cases and evaluation of the security atreefal and the downloaded material. >> are there any civilian representative snz >> yi, so the next slide shows that we will have members of the next panel, members of our own command staff and the members of the unit and members of the
department of public health. both from the clinical and the behavior health side, of the shot. >> so that we have more inclusion. so what i am trying to get and you know that i have been a part of the conversation when it comes to body cams with the sfpd and the commission. and one of the main sticking points with sfpd policy, was would the department have the ability to review the data post an incident, and an incident happens, and someone in custody makes a complaint, or something happens. and to the person in custody. and as you may recall, there was a lot of discussion around it and the policy was set with the police department set forth was, when there is an incident the police department has the ability to review the data first before the police commission. and so i am wondering if there
is a policy that exists because there is no body that set the policy discussion for the sheriff's department. we have the police commission as an over site body but there is not the same in terms of civilian oversight for the sheriff's department. so, if in the event there is an incident, what is the thinking do you review the policy and, do you review the data first? or are you turning it over to i don't know, the city attorney, but the district attorney, and i think that it has jurisdiction in this area if the prosecution needs to take place, can you shed the light or what you guys are thinking. >> the short answer to that is that we will be looking at developing a policy that will be consistent with what the policy is. and so the short answer will be if we are going to plan on matching their policy.
noechlt when we will see the final draft of this policy? >> the plan is to have the final draft at the end of the pilot program itself. that is being developed as we move along. and i don't know, supervisor tang maybe you can weigh in here sdpshgs usually you have a policy in place before you go to a pilot program. and maybe i'm, i'm incorrect and i don't know if there is anyone that can offer any advice? no one seems to be able to offer any advice. and as of. >> and through the chair, would i just say that, having some sort of a draft, i think is important right now, and at the moment, but also i understand the sheriff's department and desire to incorporate what, you know, information is gathered through the pilot program to also, have a better financial policy in place, so i understand that, and i think at the end of the 12 months, obviously we hope that you would have gathered enough data to understand how you can better roll it out with your own staff and what were some of the things that they
identified as problematic, or it could be improved upon. or even, through the committee. so, i mean, i am okay with the structure of this. >> okay, well, i'm a little uncomfortable with the structure of it. because i think that we need to have a little bit more of a fine tuning with the process. but i am going to be supportive so we can move forward. and look forward to hearing a report back. >> maybe i could offer up a little more. >> sure. >> i mean that we have a draft policy itself and that is what i was referencing when i said that we will be develop and adding to that particular, draft poll sichlt so there will be a framework that we are working with in terms of how we apply, the pilot program. and some of the constraints that we are going to have for the staff and when to use it and when not to use it, so there will a documentation on that. >> i can check with the sheriff to see if that is something that
we can share with you as well. >> that will be very good and i would be interested in doing that. >> no problem. >> let's did you complete your presentation? >> yes. >> okay. okay. let's go to the budget and analyst report. >> good morning, the staff and as you will see on page 14 of our report, the actual budget for this proposed pilot is 41,341 dollars, if the project was expanded after the conclusion of pilot, the sheriff's department estimates one time cost of $210,000, and ongoing, annual cost of $208,000 and both of these will be subject to board appropriation approval. >> so we recommend reducing the release of 135,000, by 93 stks 666 by the request budget of 41334, and then we can consider this a policy matter because it is implementing a new program.
>> thank you very much for the brief presentation. >> and chief, i think that we are good. with your presentation. i am going to open up to public comment at this time. >> thank you. >> ladies and gentlemen if you would like to speak on comment come up. sooes seeing none, public comment is closed. >> at this time i will make a motion to release the -- did we do the 135 or did you say on41. >> the dla recommends making the following amendments reducing. >> yeah, so we will do that. >> in returning, and this is the key part, returning 93 stks 666 back to the general fund. >> deputy city attorney? >> so you are not -- the budget and finance committee cannot actually return the money to the
general fund, it is just going to sit on that reserve until it is reappreciatopriated in the b in july. >> but this body is going to be acting on reducing the request to 41,334 dollars to reflect the actual cost for the cameras. >> right. >> and supervisor, tang is making would release that amount of money to 41,000 leaving another 90 some thousand dollars on reserve. >> okay, so i will restate the motion to release, only, 41,334 dollars out of the total request and the remainder will remain on reserve. >> thank you. >> and i think that this is a hearing so it does not need to go to the full board. >> it is not going to the full board. the motion is to release, and we will send a letter to the controller's office. thank you for your time and your presentation, i appreciate it. >> next item, please? >> next on the agenda,resolution
authorizing the director of property to exercise a lease extension for the real property located at 1701 ocean avenue with huey lan f. 2004 trust for a five-year extension term to commencing upon approval by the board of supervisors and the mayor, at the monthly base rent of $17,950 for a total annual base rent of $215,400. >> well, sir you don't look like claudia. >> thank you. >> chair. >> i think that you wr the real estate department. >> ma'am i am with the department of public health. >> public health, got t >> i represent the tenant. >> okay. >> madam chair, supervisor tang, and committee members, dave, the department of public health. my family clinic center is in the ocean view heights area of san francisco. cited at 1701, ocean avenue, it is a comprehensive clinic that serves 3 years to 59 with mental hel and this substance abuse treatment services. and the clinic has been located at the present site for the last ten years, previously it was a
half block down at 1760, and prior to that in the ocean avenue corridor. and we have been part of the community based services offered through the department of public health for quite some time there, i know that your time is short, if you have any questions. >> thank you. >> no questions so far. supervisor tang. >> no questions. >> okay. >> let's see let's go to the budget legislative analyst report. >> thank you. >> this exercise the first of two five year extensions the original lease was for ten years, from 07 to 17. and so this will be an additional five years, 2022. and the lease amount is going up from 31 dollars per square foot to 43 per square foot, and it is still below the amazed market value, 45 per square foot, over the five year term of the lease, the department paid, a million dollars, and a little more than a million dollars in rent, which will be subject to the board of supervisor as proval and the
annual budget and we recommend approval. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> so despite the base rate going up and it looks like there is no annual rent adjustments during this five year period. >> correct. >> all right. we are grateful to the trust for not increasing the rent during that five year period. >> let's go to public comment. >> any member of the public? seeing none. public comment is closed. >> thank you. >> what are we going to do with this supervisor tang. >> i will make a motion to approve this resolution with a positive recommendation and send it to the full board. >> without objection, that motion passes. >> next item? >> >> five,resolution authorizing the general manager of the san francisco public utilities commission (sfpuc) to execute a professional services agreement with black & veatch corporation for specialized design services for design support to mitigate ground, wire, and structure clearance issues with hetch hetchy water and power high voltage power lines in accordance with the sfpuc's mitigation program, for an amount not to exceed $12,000,000
over a term of ten years to commence following board approval through april 2027 >> okay, so we have riche here, no? >> actually dan wade. >> okay. >> so just real quick, so this is a resolution that will authorize the puc to execute professional service agreement with blackned beach. and for the design services for the design service for the power and high voltage power line and the amount not-to-exceed 12 million dollars. the puc selected black & veatch for the engineering team to specialize in the design service to mitigate, a few things. and the agreement is a ten year agreement from approximately 2017 to 2027. right? >> yes. >> that i think we got it. >> okay. >> the floor is yours. >> you have summarized very well
what this is about. good morning, supervisors i'm dan, and i am the director of the capitol projects and programs. and as you know, sfpuc operates at 160 miles of power transmission lines from what we called the up country facility and the powered facilities that generate the clean and renewable hydropower, to the newer substation on the east side of the bay, there say study completed in 2014, that showed that many stretches of these power lines, actually don't meet current requirements with respect to clearances between the ground, trees, and the other structures that are in the area. and so, it is important for us to implement mitigation measures in order to get the clearances that are required for hel and this safety of the public. and so this rfp that in place. and the board to help to us
implement the designs that are required and this is a ten year contract. and it represents about 30 percent of the total budget for this portion of the work. and we you know we, would like to move forward, to enter the agreement with the black & veatch not-to-exceed, 12 million dollars over ten years, would i be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you, i appreciate your presentation, i am going to pivot to the budget and legislative analyst. >> if they have any comments. >> this will be a two year contract, to 2027, subjected to a competitive process, and the contract is not to seek, 12 million dollars of which 8 million will be allocated towards the design services for the transmission line clearance, the high voltage clearance, and
another four million to be used for deet sign services for ongoing right-of-way. issues. >> we do have a schedule of extended here on page, 22, and the sources of of the funds are the revenue bonds and enterprise, power revenue and we do have the one recommendation, which is the technical to correct the legislation itself and otherwise we recommend approval. >> great, thank you. >> the public comment is open at this time. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. >> thank you very much. and supervisor tang? >> okay, so i will make a motion to adopts the technical amendment that was just stated by the budget analyst office and approve as amended, and sebd send to the board with positive recommendation. >> next item. >> number 6, the emergency declaration of the san francisco public utilities commission, and to construct a temporary road
around an area.resolution approving an emergency declaration of the san francisco public utilities commission pursuant to administrative code, section 6.60, to construct a temporary road around a landslide area at calaveras road; with a total estimated cost not to exceed $1,500,000. nechltd we have dan presenting again. >> thank you, supervisors, if you could go to the slides please? >> i would like to present this emergency declaration for temperature construction by pass of the land slide and the background of this is in january when we have had multiple back to back storms, and a land slide oskurd on down slope edge of the 100 foot section of the road. and now this is property that is owned by san francisco, but alamena county has a right away for the road through this stretch. and so this is the only point of access to the replacement project which is an ongoing project that is part of the 4.8 water system approvement program for the large equipment and materials to the construction site. and the replacement project, will be delayed until the
contractor can once again access the construction site fully. and this is a critical project that you have heard about this over the years for me, and others. and for providing continuous delivery of water to 2.6, million people in the san francisco bay area. and this is a photo of the land slides. this is a very narrow section of road. and the land slide essentially cut off access and so the county you know, is responsible for repairs to the road. but they have a lot of land slides all over the county. and this is just one of a number of slides that they need to get to over time. and so, the road is currently closed and they have advised that they will not be able to implement the repairs until the summer of 2017, at the earliest and so we are, you know, in the middle of this critical 7 year construction project. and we finished the spillway last year. and we have finished the
excavation. but it cannot go on to service until the new dam is in place, and that will be constructed over the next 18 months and, without the spillway, the occurrence of the extreme flood event can lead to over topping and catastrophic dam failure, so you want the construction project to go through as few as possible. and so, as a result we declared an emergency under section 6.60 of the administrative code on february 27th. >> and so, that emergency declaration is to horize the sfpuc to enter into agreement with our contractor, and that is building the dam. to address this issue on the road. and we anticipate that it will be about 1.5 million dollars, and we have funds available in the construction contract to do this work. and so our request is to approve
this emergency contract. and to have the contractor construct the temporary by pass road around the slide and it will continue the project. >> all right. >> thank you. >> supervisor tang. >> thank you. and so then, once the county completes it's work, that it needs to do, then this temporary road will go away. >> that is right. >> and the county is not going to reimburse puc or anything for this temporary road that we have to create because of their own delay. >> no. >> no. >> okay. >> well i mean that i certainly understand. >> they are cooperating with us to make to give us an encroachment permit to tie the teemary road into the permanent road and again they are going to do their own work to implement a permanent solution. >> okay. >> i understand that the contractor is already on the site. >> the contractor is already on site and the work has begun right after the emergency declarati declaration. >> we are going to hear from the budget analyst. >> yes, the proposed resolution,
approves the emergency by the puc and then does allow to puc to enter into a contract for the repairs of the road. the contractor was originally selected for the dam project through a come poetive process, the budget of 1.5 million is on page, 26 of our report. and when this budget was created by the contractor but the puc says that they did review it for reasonableness for the cost because it is not through a competitive process, and the funds to pay for the contract are in the capitol budget for the dam, and that was previously appropriate ated and we recommend approval. >> thank you. >> how much was previously appropriate ated in the budget do you know? >> oh, for the dam? >> yes. >> it has been appropriate ate and reappropriated many times sxts very large, i will have mr. wade tell where you it is now. >> thank you. >> the current budget of the dam replacement is 810 million. >> okay. >> so it is all right, that sounds good. thank you, we are okay. >> supervisor tang?
>> thank you. question for the puc. so, the land slide took place on january 10, of 2017 and the emergency declaration was not until february 27th and i am just wondering more than a month passed almost two months, and so i just wanted to kind of see was it --. >> yes. >> the time amount to determine that it was an emergency. >> excellent question and so, immediately, we initiated the discussions with the county, over their plans to repair the road. and so it took some time for us to meet with them and to get a clear answer from them as to what their plans were. and we requested that they immediately repair the road. and it took some time to you know forks them to get back to us with clear plans. as to what they proposed to do. and it also took some time for us to negotiate an agreement with them where we could actually build this temporary by pass around this road. >> and now, in the winter, we
were not losing a lot of time. because, we had continued rains and there wasn't a lot of construction going on any way. and so the critical time point for us to have this road in place, is actually over the next month or so. >> okay. >> thank you. >> all right, thank you. >> public comment is open. >> and seeing that there is no one here for public comment, it is closed. >> thank you. >> okay, i will make a motion to approve or sent forth this resolution with positive recommendation to the full board. >> thank you. >> without objection that motion passes. >> mr. clerk s there any other business before this body. >> that completes at again da for today. thank you very much, this meeting is adjourned.
- working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrant and dynamic city that's on the forefront of economic growth, the arts, and social change. our city has always been on the edge of progress and innovation. after all, we're at the meeting of land and sea. - our city is famous for its iconic scenery, historic designs, and world-class style. it's the birthplace of blue jeans, and where "the rock" holds court over the largest natural harbor on the west coast. - our 28,000 city and county employees play an important role in making san francisco what it is today. - we provide residents and visitors with a wide array of services, such as improving city streets and parks, keeping communities safe, and driving buses and cable cars. - our employees enjoy competitive salaries,
>> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. this meeting will come to order. this is a regular meeting of the full budget. i'm supervisor -- to my left is supervisor tang and to my right is supervisor fewer. and supervisor sheehy. supervisor yee, we need to take a motion to excuse >> yes, i would like to include supervisor kim in that motion >> yes, i would like to include supervisor yee and kim for a motion to excuse. >> tang. >> i would like to make a motion to excuse yee and kim. >> second. >> seconded by second. supervisor fewer. without